Discussion of movies and ReelThoughts topics

It is currently Wed Aug 20, 2014 2:49 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 69 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
IDENTITY THIEF 
Author Message
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3470
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: IDENTITY THIEF
peng wrote:
Almost all of Lincoln's performances are GREAT (a few others range from serviceable to good). The trailer is silly and mauldin, which are not the two words I would describe the actual movie AT ALL. Vexer, I know you righfully use the word "seem" and "look" because you have not watched Lincoln yet, but it still seems like a lot negativity towards a film you haven't seen based on Dustin Putman (you over-saturate his links so much to us that I instinctively didn't like him at first, but he's an OK reviewer most of the time, really, except proning to hyperboles from time to time) and 23 other reviews (out of a total 233, even).

As for Identity Thief, I love Jason Bateman and Horrible Bosses, but after the trailer combined with the reviews, I will give it a pass.

Even if Dustin gave the film a positive review, I still wouldn't want to see it. Can you honestly say that you've never avoided a film based on how awful the trailer made it look? Why should I waste two and a half hours of my life seeing a film which i'm positive i'm not going to like? I don't care how many critics loved it, that means nothing to me.


Tue Feb 12, 2013 2:03 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 4:57 pm
Posts: 422
Post Re: IDENTITY THIEF
Vexer wrote:
Can you honestly say that you've never avoided a film based on how awful the trailer made it look?


Never cause unlike you I have an open mind. If you give things a chance, something might suprise you.


Tue Feb 12, 2013 4:57 pm
Profile
Cinematographer

Joined: Sat May 05, 2012 4:33 pm
Posts: 584
Post Re: IDENTITY THIEF
I think that we're getting off-topic here, but I might as well throw in my two cents while we are.

A. I saw Identity Thief, having a feeling that I would hate it. I did not think I would hate it as much as I did. I was mistaken. Zero stars. Easily the worst movie James has reviewed so far this year. The sad thing is that it doesn't even crack my bottom five. January and February have been brutal.

B. I like the fact that Dustin Putman gave Drive ****, seeing as it was my second favorite movie of 2011. However, I just cannot take him seriously. Even if you do not like Lincoln, you cannot possible give it 1/2*, ranking it on your website alongside A Haunted House and below Movie 43. At least Lincoln aspired to tell a great story. Is it flawless? No. However, it was my fifth favorite film of 2012, and I would give it ***1/2. There should at least be a two-star difference between Lincoln and those two cinematic atrocities. At least. Being a history buff, I did find it mildly annoying that the film portrayed Lincoln as an abolitionist, when in fact he wasn't one at all, but I still enjoyed the experience. It certainly does not deserve 1/2*.

C. I have never heard anyone utter either of the following phrase: "Gee, this movie looks interesting. I wonder what Rex Reed thought of it." I have also never heard anyone say this line: "Rex Reed is my favorite film critic." Reed is irrelevant. The one movie he starred in is one of the worst ever made, and his credibility ranks below that of Armond White and Michelle Alexandria. Am I saying that Melissa McCarthy is at a healthy weight? No. However, I would never ridicule her appearance in a professional review of mine.

D. Vexer does have interesting tastes. I have a feeling that if we were to meet in real life, we would hate each other. Nonetheless, I respect his opinion, even thought I think that is insane. By the way, who is your profile picture a photo of? Is it someone famous whose name I should probably know, or it is just someone obscure? I cannot tell.

E. Michael Bay is a hack whose license to make movies should be revoked. He should be in the unemployment line alongside M. Night Shyamalan, Peter Berg, and Uwe Boll.


Tue Feb 12, 2013 5:24 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2010 8:35 am
Posts: 423
Post Re: IDENTITY THIEF
Isn't that a photo of Lindsay Lohan? That seems to be Vexer's go to profile pic right?

Anyways, star ratings are stupid. So is comparing one review to another. You can't say "you need to give this film a minimum rating of six elephants out of 68.5, because it's too well made, and the subject matter is important!" People feel what they feel, as long as the opinion is honest and true, then it should be regarded as a legitimate expression of feeling. There's no metric standard for what a star rating is worth, nor any scale that can be used to compare the two. They're just an arbitrary visual expression of how you felt about the film, from strongly liking to absolutely hating. There's no quantifiable value, so stop pretending they actually measure anything besides "Gee I really liked that" or "Holy cow that was godawful".


Tue Feb 12, 2013 7:31 pm
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3470
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: IDENTITY THIEF
Sean wrote:
I think that we're getting off-topic here, but I might as well throw in my two cents while we are.

A. I saw Identity Thief, having a feeling that I would hate it. I did not think I would hate it as much as I did. I was mistaken. Zero stars. Easily the worst movie James has reviewed so far this year. The sad thing is that it doesn't even crack my bottom five. January and February have been brutal.

B. I like the fact that Dustin Putman gave Drive ****, seeing as it was my second favorite movie of 2011. However, I just cannot take him seriously. Even if you do not like Lincoln, you cannot possible give it 1/2*, ranking it on your website alongside A Haunted House and below Movie 43. At least Lincoln aspired to tell a great story. Is it flawless? No. However, it was my fifth favorite film of 2012, and I would give it ***1/2. There should at least be a two-star difference between Lincoln and those two cinematic atrocities. At least. Being a history buff, I did find it mildly annoying that the film portrayed Lincoln as an abolitionist, when in fact he wasn't one at all, but I still enjoyed the experience. It certainly does not deserve 1/2*.

C. I have never heard anyone utter either of the following phrase: "Gee, this movie looks interesting. I wonder what Rex Reed thought of it." I have also never heard anyone say this line: "Rex Reed is my favorite film critic." Reed is irrelevant. The one movie he starred in is one of the worst ever made, and his credibility ranks below that of Armond White and Michelle Alexandria. Am I saying that Melissa McCarthy is at a healthy weight? No. However, I would never ridicule her appearance in a professional review of mine.

D. Vexer does have interesting tastes. I have a feeling that if we were to meet in real life, we would hate each other. Nonetheless, I respect his opinion, even thought I think that is insane. By the way, who is your profile picture a photo of? Is it someone famous whose name I should probably know, or it is just someone obscure? I cannot tell.

E. Michael Bay is a hack whose license to make movies should be revoked. He should be in the unemployment line alongside M. Night Shyamalan, Peter Berg, and Uwe Boll.

The person in my profile pic is Lindsay Lohan.

I cna understand you calling M Night, Boll and Bay hacks(though IMO Shyamalan is the only person who truly deserves to be called that)but Peter Berg? seriously? OK i'm guessing you probably hated Battleship, but what about the rest of his filmography? Very Bad Things is an excellent dark comedy and The Kingdom is damn good action-thriller, I definitely wouldn't call him a hack.

I think McCarthy actually looks better then some ultra-thin supermodel-type women.

I just hate it when people say that you can't possibly give a certain film a low/high rating(that's why I never use ratings when I review a film), just beause most critics loved Lincoln DOES NOT, I repeat, DOES NOT mean EVERYONE has to love it, critics have EVERY right to give it a negative review if they hated it, the way you worded your post makes it sound like you're saying that your opinion is the only correct one, so I have a hard time taking your reviews seriously. To me it dosen't matter so much what a film aspires to do, it's whether it actually works or not that matters, Alexander and THe Alamo both certainly aspired to tell a great story and they failed miserably at it, and some critics felt that Lincoln failed miserably telling a great story. Also comedy is subjective, so it's not at all inconceivable that someone could enjoy A Haunted House/Movie 43 but despise Lincoln(that would most likely be the case with me), you can call that person crazy, but that dosen't automatically make they're opinion incorrect. I think you're feeling the effects of what I call the Spielberg Halo :lol:


Tue Feb 12, 2013 7:44 pm
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3470
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: IDENTITY THIEF
patrick wrote:
Vexer wrote:
Can you honestly say that you've never avoided a film based on how awful the trailer made it look?


Never cause unlike you I have an open mind. If you give things a chance, something might suprise you.

Really? So you'd actually be willing to check out say Movie 43? Also I have given some films a chance despite being less then impressed by the trailer, like The Fighter, the trailer made it look kinda cliched so I wasn't too sure about it, but I decided to check it out from my library and I liked more then I thought I would.


Tue Feb 12, 2013 7:49 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 4:57 pm
Posts: 422
Post Re: IDENTITY THIEF
Vexer wrote:
patrick wrote:
Vexer wrote:
Can you honestly say that you've never avoided a film based on how awful the trailer made it look?


Never cause unlike you I have an open mind. If you give things a chance, something might suprise you.

Really? So you'd actually be willing to check out say Movie 43? Also I have given some films a chance despite being less then impressed by the trailer, like The Fighter, the trailer made it look kinda cliched so I wasn't too sure about it, but I decided to check it out from my library and I liked more then I thought I would.


Yes, even Movie 43 just to see how bad it really is.


Tue Feb 12, 2013 8:24 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2010 8:35 am
Posts: 423
Post Re: IDENTITY THIEF
I have no desire to see Movie 43, but I have no right to call it a bad movie until I see it with my own eyes. I'll say it looks bad, but that statement has absolutely no weight behind it. I thought Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes looked bad (and that the title was all sorts of dumb), but it turned out to be one of my favorite films of that year. I think Vexer wouldn't have much more credibility if he actually saw the films he was criticizing, but since that doesn't seem to be what he's aiming for, I don't really feel the need to complain about it :P


Tue Feb 12, 2013 8:34 pm
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:26 pm
Posts: 2157
Post Re: IDENTITY THIEF
Vexer wrote:
[Reveal] Spoiler:
Well it wasn't like the person he victimized was entirely innocent, it was Sandy's boss, who had pretty much just cost him a job and we saw him do plenty to make his employees lives miserable, so I didn't feel the least bit sorry for him, it was pure karma, I can think of several people in real life that are deserving of such a fate, and it was Diana's idea to do it anyways, Sandy only went along because he couldn't think of any other option
Whether Diana is "funny" or not is a matter of opinion, and I thought she was hilarious, I didn't mind the fim getting melo-dramatic at times, I think that made it stand out from other comedies.

That's a rationalization. I'm sure there's one for every one of Diana's marks that the movie didn't show, including Bateman's character. Also, that's not how karma works. Karma is in the workings of the universe, not in the deliberate actions of people out for a little vengeance.

Not to mention that Sandy went along with the whole thing, including the stuff that was pure self-indulgence and not necessary in the slightest, so there goes the last shred of an excuse.

_________________
The temptation is to like what you should like--not what you do like... another temptation is to come up with an interesting reason for liking it that may not actually be the reason you like it.


Tue Feb 12, 2013 8:43 pm
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3470
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: IDENTITY THIEF
Ken wrote:
Vexer wrote:
[Reveal] Spoiler:
Well it wasn't like the person he victimized was entirely innocent, it was Sandy's boss, who had pretty much just cost him a job and we saw him do plenty to make his employees lives miserable, so I didn't feel the least bit sorry for him, it was pure karma, I can think of several people in real life that are deserving of such a fate, and it was Diana's idea to do it anyways, Sandy only went along because he couldn't think of any other option
Whether Diana is "funny" or not is a matter of opinion, and I thought she was hilarious, I didn't mind the fim getting melo-dramatic at times, I think that made it stand out from other comedies.

That's a rationalization. I'm sure there's one for every one of Diana's marks that the movie didn't show, including Bateman's character. Also, that's not how karma works. Karma is in the workings of the universe, not in the deliberate actions of people out for a little vengeance.

Not to mention that Sandy went along with the whole thing, including the stuff that was pure self-indulgence and not necessary in the slightest, so there goes the last shred of an excuse.

Well i'm sure there's a lot of people in OWS who would LOVE to do that sort of thing to those rich assholes, so I was still pretty satisfied with how hat played out in the film, probably cause I would've done the same thing myself.


Tue Feb 12, 2013 9:51 pm
Profile
Producer

Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 11:04 am
Posts: 2156
Post Re: IDENTITY THIEF
Peter Berg is awesome. Yes, Battleship was not good. Although I thought it was more mediocre than outright terrible. But that said, Battleship aside, he's a very solid filmmaker.

I want to defend M Night, but I can't. His career has sunken too low. Although I really do hope he makes a comeback. I think After Earth could potentially be interesting.


Wed Feb 13, 2013 12:54 am
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3470
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: IDENTITY THIEF
ilovemovies wrote:
Peter Berg is awesome. Yes, Battleship was not good. Although I thought it was more mediocre than outright terrible. But that said, Battleship aside, he's a very solid filmmaker.

I want to defend M Night, but I can't. His career has sunken too low. Although I really do hope he makes a comeback. I think After Earth could potentially be interesting.

Even if I have to admit that After Earth looks pretty good.


Wed Feb 13, 2013 1:04 am
Profile
Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 10:42 pm
Posts: 1402
Location: Bangkok
Post Re: IDENTITY THIEF
Vexer wrote:
Even if Dustin gave the film a positive review, I still wouldn't want to see it. Can you honestly say that you've never avoided a film based on how awful the trailer made it look? Why should I waste two and a half hours of my life seeing a film which i'm positive i'm not going to like? I don't care how many critics loved it, that means nothing to me.


Honestly, yes. Films like Lincoln proved this to me. (Although now that I've thought about it, you might still not like Lincoln, but not because of the trailer, but because of it's a 2.5-hours movie with 90% talking. No matter how well made or engrossing it is, I've known you have trouble sitting in the theater with films that long, and for a movie with no action, you probably might not like it. Still, that's a better way to presume what films you don't want to watch, based on facts, rather than based solely on trailers. I mean, it's still 1 person assembling a trailer vs 200+ people giving opinions.)


Wed Feb 13, 2013 4:13 am
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3470
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: IDENTITY THIEF
peng wrote:
Vexer wrote:
Even if Dustin gave the film a positive review, I still wouldn't want to see it. Can you honestly say that you've never avoided a film based on how awful the trailer made it look? Why should I waste two and a half hours of my life seeing a film which i'm positive i'm not going to like? I don't care how many critics loved it, that means nothing to me.


Honestly, yes. Films like Lincoln proved this to me. (Although now that I've thought about it, you might still not like Lincoln, but not because of the trailer, but because of it's a 2.5-hours movie with 90% talking. No matter how well made or engrossing it is, I've known you have trouble sitting in the theater with films that long, and for a movie with no action, you probably might not like it. Still, that's a better way to presume what films you don't want to watch, based on facts, rather than based solely on trailers. I mean, it's still 1 person assembling a trailer vs 200+ people giving opinions.)
Well you're a better man then me, the trailer isn't the sole reason for me avoiding films, but it sure dosen't help when it looks bad(like the trailer for that new Halle Berry film "The Call", I have a hard time believing that film won't be an inane waste of time)Also, i'm not real big on most historical dramas, so it's not just the trailer that turned me off, even for home viewing, two and a half hours can be pretty taxing for me, it's tough to watch most films that long in one sitting(though there are exceptions, like The Departed)


Wed Feb 13, 2013 4:24 am
Profile
Site Admin

Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 10:55 pm
Posts: 3132
Location: Mount Laurel, NJ, USA
Post Re: IDENTITY THIEF
nitrium wrote:
ilovemovies wrote:
Lincoln is too well made, and too well acted, especially Daniel Day Lewis's AMAZING performance, to deserve anything less than 2 stars.

I haven't seen anything beyond the trailer, but the acting in that looks absolutely atrocious. It could be the ridiculous OTT dialogue too, of course.

Abe <shaking fists>: "The fate of human dignity is in our hands!"
Me: <rolling eyes>.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qiSAbAuLhqs
I don't want to be patronizing, but I'm guessing this plays better to Americans maybe? To me it LOOKS awful. Just awful.


Be careful about judging a movie like LINCOLN based on trailers. This isn't the kind of movie that can be reduced to quick shots and sound bytes. See the whole movie, then judge it.

The same isn't true of IDENTITY THIEF. The trailer gives an accurate sense of the movie as whole.


Wed Feb 13, 2013 2:22 pm
Profile WWW
Cinematographer

Joined: Sat May 05, 2012 4:33 pm
Posts: 584
Post Re: IDENTITY THIEF
Where did Occupy Wall Street come from? :shock:

Well, I simply believe that the ability to hold an opinion does not fulfill the criteria for being a film critic. I simply cannot understand how anyone could look upon Lincoln, with its fine performance from Daniel Day-Lewis and company, and reduce it to a level beneath Movie 43, which I personally believe might just be the worst film of this decade so far.

I'm still angry with Peter Berg over Battleship. That's all.


Wed Feb 13, 2013 6:18 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2010 8:35 am
Posts: 423
Post Re: IDENTITY THIEF
Sean wrote:
Well, I simply believe that the ability to hold an opinion does not fulfill the criteria for being a film critic. I simply cannot understand how anyone could look upon Lincoln, with its fine performance from Daniel Day-Lewis and company, and reduce it to a level beneath Movie 43, which I personally believe might just be the worst film of this decade so far.


Yeah! You should at the very least be an Engineer with a Star Trek obsession and an Internet connection!


Wed Feb 13, 2013 7:04 pm
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3470
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: IDENTITY THIEF
Sean wrote:
Where did Occupy Wall Street come from? :shock:

Well, I simply believe that the ability to hold an opinion does not fulfill the criteria for being a film critic. I simply cannot understand how anyone could look upon Lincoln, with its fine performance from Daniel Day-Lewis and company, and reduce it to a level beneath Movie 43, which I personally believe might just be the worst film of this decade so far.

I'm still angry with Peter Berg over Battleship. That's all.

I'm not comparing the two films, I look at films a similar way that Ebert does-judge it based on how well it succeeds within it's genre, so if I did see Movie 43, I would not compare it to Lincoln since it's a totally different genre, instead I would judge it based on how well it succeeded at making me laugh, and for historical dramas like Alexander, I judge based on how compelling they are, and Alexander failed in that regard, and some critics felt that Lincoln simply did not succeed as a historical drama. Also not everyone HAS to like DDL, you're basically implying that anyone who dosen't like him is not a "real" film critic, which sounds pretty narrow-minded. Some of the negative reviews for Lincoln did have good things to say about DDL, but they simply felt as though the rest of the film was not nearly as good as his performance, and the others said they normally did like DDL, just not in that film.


Wed Feb 13, 2013 8:15 pm
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3470
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: IDENTITY THIEF
James Berardinelli wrote:
nitrium wrote:
ilovemovies wrote:
Lincoln is too well made, and too well acted, especially Daniel Day Lewis's AMAZING performance, to deserve anything less than 2 stars.

I haven't seen anything beyond the trailer, but the acting in that looks absolutely atrocious. It could be the ridiculous OTT dialogue too, of course.

Abe <shaking fists>: "The fate of human dignity is in our hands!"
Me: <rolling eyes>.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qiSAbAuLhqs
I don't want to be patronizing, but I'm guessing this plays better to Americans maybe? To me it LOOKS awful. Just awful.


Be careful about judging a movie like LINCOLN based on trailers. This isn't the kind of movie that can be reduced to quick shots and sound bytes. See the whole movie, then judge it.

The same isn't true of IDENTITY THIEF. The trailer gives an accurate sense of the movie as whole.

Well your review pretty much convinced me that's it's not my type of film, so there's no sense in wasting two and a half hours on something i'm pretty sure I won't like.


Wed Feb 13, 2013 8:18 pm
Profile
Cinematographer

Joined: Sat May 05, 2012 4:33 pm
Posts: 584
Post Re: IDENTITY THIEF
Accidentally shared that post twice. My mistake.


Last edited by Sean on Wed Feb 13, 2013 10:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Wed Feb 13, 2013 10:37 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 69 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forum/DivisionCore.
Translated by Xaphos © 2007, 2008, 2009 phpBB.fr